Hi Alex, > Would zone-level BGP peers be those used by default for establishing new BGP > peers in networks where dynamic routing is enabled?
Correct, so far we plan to allow for up to 4 BGP peers for a zone, with the possibility to setup different metrics to each peer. > This could affect a multi-tenant model where there may be different BGP peers > presented based on what the upstream network provides. An example of >this > would be where the VLANs associated to a given account are associated to > distinct VRFs and may have different peering IP addresses. > I would like to see the peering IP addresses specific to the networks where > dynamic routing is enabled instead of specifying defaults at the zone level. This is a very valid point. We could add network specific BGP peers as well, which would override the automatic AS allocation, in the same way that we now allocate DNS servers in the zone level but can override that by manually selecting different DNS servers at network creation time. Would that address your point? Cheers, Alex -----Original Message----- From: Dietrich, Alex <adietr...@ussignal.com.INVALID> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 2:34 PM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; d...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: Dynamic routing for routed mode IPv6 and IPv4 Isolated and VPC networks Hi Alex, I appreciate the clarity! Excuse my ignorance if I am misunderstanding the intention of specifying BGP peers at the zone level. Would zone-level BGP peers be those used by default for establishing new BGP peers in networks where dynamic routing is enabled? This could affect a multi-tenant model where there may be different BGP peers presented based on what the upstream network provides. An example of this would be where the VLANs associated to a given account are associated to distinct VRFs and may have different peering IP addresses. I would like to see the peering IP addresses specific to the networks where dynamic routing is enabled instead of specifying defaults at the zone level. * Alex [__tpx__] From: Alex Mattioli <alex.matti...@shapeblue.com> Date: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 at 9:27 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org <users@cloudstack.apache.org>, d...@cloudstack.apache.org <d...@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: RE: Dynamic routing for routed mode IPv6 and IPv4 Isolated and VPC networks EXTERNAL Hi Alex, Answers inline below with > Cheers -----Original Message----- From: Dietrich, Alex <adietr...@ussignal.com.INVALID> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 3:12 PM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; d...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: Dynamic routing for routed mode IPv6 and IPv4 Isolated and VPC networks Hello Alex, I appreciate you taking on this initiative as I’d like to see similar functionality made available in CloudStack. I do have some feedback on your implementation approach: 1 - Operator configures one or more BGP peers for a given Zone (with different metrics) What is the intention behind specifying BGP peers at the zone level? I would think this would need to be specific to the network that you want to enable BGP on and does not need to concern the entire zone. >The goal is for the process to be drive by the end user without operator >intervention. In the current design we'd enable the VR to share routes with >upstream routers without any need for extra configuration on the part of the >operator. >Your point is very valid and it should definitely be a future enhancement on >the feature. 2 - Operator presents a pool of Private AS numbers to the Zone (just like we do for VLANs) As a private AS consumer, I agree that this approach would be helpful for a more dynamic allocation as new dynamic routing enabled networks are created. >Glad we are in the same page there. 3 - When a network is created with an offering which has dynamic routing enabled an AS number is allocated to the network 4 - ACS configures the BGP session on the VR (using FRR), advertising all its connected networks Given there is a lot of extensibility within BGP, I would think there would need to be some level of customizability to the peering configurations. Is the intention to consider adding additional knobs, or relegating that to the upstream BGP peer? I could see scenarios where you would at least want to have control over prefix lengths, etc. >Absolutely, but I think this should be a future enhancement, the current goal >is to have a very simple and basic dynamic BGP implementation working, after >that's out there and in use then we definitely should discuss how to enhance >the >feature with exactly what you pointed out. Thanks, Alex Dietrich [__tpx__] From: Alex Mattioli <alex.matti...@shapeblue.com> Date: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 at 8:55 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org <users@cloudstack.apache.org>, d...@cloudstack.apache.org <d...@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: RE: Dynamic routing for routed mode IPv6 and IPv4 Isolated and VPC networks EXTERNAL Hi all, Does anyone have an opinion on the implementation of dynamic routing in Isolated networks and VPCs? So far the design is: 1 - Operator configures one or more BGP peers for a given Zone (with different metrics) 2 - Operator presents a pool of Private AS numbers to the Zone (just like we do for VLANs) 3 - When a network is created with an offering which has dynamic routing enabled an AS number is allocated to the network 4 - ACS configures the BGP session on the VR (using FRR), advertising all its connected networks Any and all input will be very welcome. Cheers, Alex From: Alex Mattioli Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2024 3:25 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; d...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Dynamic routing for routed mode IPv6 and IPv4 Isolated and VPC networks Hi all, I'd like to brainstorm dynamic routing in ACS (yes, again... for the newcomers to this mailing list - this has been discussed multiple times in the past 10+ years) ACS 4.17 has introduced routed mode for IPv6 in Isolated networks and VPCs, we are currently working on extending that to IPv4 as well, which will support the current NAT'ed mode and also a routed mode (inspired by the NSX integration https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ao-vv7Ahk__;!!P9cq_d3Gyw!gRe7Js-1plXE8vRRc_mJQIri5T4-Z1zOFVmqEwmHGE_AGkN6P6BU5T8nq0WL4Fx0MTwP0p-ucEL6DjwFzB7TaoBNnS4$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ao-vv7Ahk__;!!P9cq_d3Gyw!gRe7Js-1plXE8vRRc_mJQIri5T4-Z1zOFVmqEwmHGE_AGkN6P6BU5T8nq0WL4Fx0MTwP0p-ucEL6DjwFzB7TaoBNnS4$><https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ao-vv7Ahk__;!!P9cq_d3Gyw!gRe7Js-1plXE8vRRc_mJQIri5T4-Z1zOFVmqEwmHGE_AGkN6P6BU5T8nq0WL4Fx0MTwP0p-ucEL6DjwFzB7TaoBNnS4$%3chttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ao-vv7Ahk__;!!P9cq_d3Gyw!gRe7Js-1plXE8vRRc_mJQIri5T4-Z1zOFVmqEwmHGE_AGkN6P6BU5T8nq0WL4Fx0MTwP0p-ucEL6DjwFzB7TaoBNnS4$%3e> ). With stock ACS (i.e. without NSX or OpenSDN) this routing is purely static, with the operator being responsible to add static routes to the Isolated network or VPC tiers via the "public" (outside) IP of the virtual router. The next step on this journey is to add some kind of dynamic routing. One way that I have in mind is using dynamic BGP: 1 - Operator configures one or more BGP peers for a given Zone (with different metrics) 2 - Operator presents a pool of Private AS numbers to the Zone (just like we do for VLANs) 3 - When a network is created with an offering which has dynamic routing enabled an AS number is allocated 4 - ACS configures the BGP session on the VR, advertising all its connected networks This way there's no need to reconfigure the upstream router for each new ACS network (it just needs to allow dynamic BGP peering from the pool of AS numbers presented to the zone) This implementation could also be used for Shared Networks, in which case the destination advertised via BGP is to the gateway of the shared network. There could also be an offering where we allow for end users to setup the BGP parameters for their Isolated or VPC networks, which can then peer with upstream VNF(s). Any and all input is very welcome... Taking the liberty to tag some of you: @Wei Zhou<mailto:wei.z...@shapeblue.com> @Wido den Hollander<mailto:w...@widodh.nl> @Kristaps Čudars<mailto:kristaps.cud...@telia.lv> Cheers, Alex
